James Johnson


I'd say a good trade considering we got him for a future second-rounder.

Maybe Colangelo freaked out when Petrie kept calling him for Calderon. LOL

Well he be a SF or PF? Probably he'll be challenging that SF spot. Kid got size (6'8"-6'9") and bulk. I think he came out of the 2009 draft as SF. But a bit slow footed than most starting SF in the league, IMO. But still I have better hopes on him than any of SF we have right now. Could be a steal if he outplays any of the current SF we have.

However, if Smart transcends to his inner Nelly, I we're more likely to see him at PF.
http://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/statuses/224776290329309185
 
It really is a **** move! A nothing move, that does not improve us in any way shape or form. All it does is it chews up $2.8 million of cap space next season. Why bother I ask?!
 
It really is a **** move! A nothing move, that does not improve us in any way shape or form. All it does is it chews up $2.8 million of cap space next season. Why bother I ask?!

Don't be to pessimistic man. With our history of draft picks for the last 5 years, IT is the only 2nd round that earned good minutes.
So we get this the resource we don't use. $2.8 is pretty good deal compared to how much we're paying Salmons, Outlaw, and the rest of the SF in this team.

Watch till he gets good minutes. This kid will be good.
 
Don't be to pessimistic man. With our history of draft picks for the last 5 years, IT is the only 2nd round that earned good minutes.
So we get this the resource we don't use. $2.8 is pretty good deal compared to how much we're paying Salmons, Outlaw, and the rest of the SF in this team.

Watch till he gets good minutes. This kid will be good.

It is not about the 2nd rounder! It is about wasting cap space on non-impact players. Last off-season I was hearing how JJ Hickson is going to be an all star and Hayes will improve us defensively by a significant margin and we all know how that ended up. This is pretty much the same move. Its a nothing move, a non-impact move that chews up half the salary cap we had. With $6 million we still could have signed a reasonable player. We have not halved that limiting our ability to get things done for NEXT season.

It is yet another nothing move in line of many by this organization. Johnson won't improve us in any way. He can't guard SFs and is not big enough to be a PF. A classic tweener of the wrong variety.

Lets talk in 10 months time and see who is right. Its a nothing move. A move for the sake of making a move without any thought process or planning.
 
One of our biggest weaknesses from the SF last season was Salmons, Cisco and Outlaw not being able to spread the floor for Evans and Cousins, and yet we went out and got ourselves a SF who shot a total of 60 3PT shots in about 60 games.
 
One of our biggest weaknesses from the SF last season was Salmons, Cisco and Outlaw not being able to spread the floor for Evans and Cousins, and yet we went out and got ourselves a SF who shot a total of 60 3PT shots in about 60 games.

An even bigger weakness was Salmons, Cisco, and Outlaw not being able to stop anyone from scoring on them
 
An even bigger weakness was Salmons, Cisco, and Outlaw not being able to stop anyone from scoring on them

True, but if we roll out a lineup of IT-Evans-JJ-TRob-Cousins, teams should just pack the paint with their starting 4 (obviously guarding Thomas) and we're done for. Guess the team is putting a ton of hope on Jimmer....yikes.
 
True, but if we roll out a lineup of IT-Evans-JJ-TRob-Cousins, teams should just pack the paint with their starting 4 (obviously guarding Thomas) and we're done for. Guess the team is putting a ton of hope on Jimmer....yikes.

That is area of concern.
On the flip side, both our bigs have good mid range game. Also, if Reke cannot get to the level to be able to hit wide open 3, we are in trouble anyway. Jury is still out on this issue.
 
Ladies and gentlemen this trade has been proudly brought to you by

maloofs.jpg
 
Ladies and gentlemen this trade has been proudly brought to you by

maloofs.jpg

You were expecting Rudy Gay? This is a solid move w the five mil we had left. If he sucks we can cut him after this year. low risk move.
 
We still need to unload about three bodies to really help the team and define roles. With too many middling bodies, it's too easy to shuffle around lineups for yet another season. Yeah, he might be a nice pickup, but we really need to stop bargain basement dumpster diving in the hopes of striking gold.
 
You were expecting Rudy Gay? This is a solid move w the five mil we had left. If he sucks we can cut him after this year. low risk move.

Despite popular belief, I was not expecting any of the big names being bandied around (Gay, Iggy, Granger etc) but what I was expecting was for us to be smart about who we get and how much we spend.

We had $6 million under the cap which can get you a reasonably good player either via trade or via free agency. You also take into account Garcia's expiring and you have some currency to work with. Not great but it gives us some flexibility.

What we have done is halved that salary cap room and added yet another average player to an already average lot at SF. He does not make us better. In fact, I am not convinced he is ahead any of our sorry lot at SF. He struggles guarding a lot of SFs because of his lack of leg speed and footwork. He is a classic tweener.

I honestly would have rather seen up re-sign T-Will for that $2.8 million and call it a day and just see if anything else pops up where we can use that cap space and expiring deal to get solid player via trade down the track.

As it is now, we have limited ourselves for the season and most likely this move mean that we are not getting Williams back. When its all said and done, I don't think we got better at all. If anything, if Williams leaves, we are LESS talented (not counting T-Rob) because Williams is a more talented player than Johnson and I rather spend $3 million on an obvious talent, than on a classic tweener without real position in the NBA.

That is just me. Teams that are run well do not make these types of deals. Teams run by deluded, penny pinching owners precisely make these type of moves. I still go back to a clear fact, if James Johnson is as good as people here are making him out to be, he would not have been replaced by Ladry Fields and Toronto would not have been looking to trade him considering they are in just as desperate need for a SF as we are.

Further to that, we did not trade for Wright because apparently he was not enough of an upgrade for us but James Johnson is. While neither is ideal, Wright is a better player than Johnson.

All I want is for us to be smart about spending money and getting a clear upgrade at the position. This is yet another ill advised move where we spend the money and NOT get a clear upgrade at the position.

To season in a row we have blown away some $20 million of salary cap on Salmons, Hayes, Outlaw and Johnson and neither of them is a starter and most of them are not key role players on a good team. On lottery teams they might start but on good teams they are not rotation players.
 
Tayshaun Prince

I was hoping for Prince, not to draft some dude named Johnson trade for cash then trade a future second for some dude named Johnson.
 
So now we have Salmons (just over $8 million), Garcia (just over $6.1 million), Outlaw ($3 million) and Johnson (just over $2.8 million) totalling $20 million invested in one position and not a legitimate starter between them.

Way to manage the finances and roster spots Kings. Awesome management and future planning. This is GM of the year type stuff! :rolleyes:
 
Despite popular belief, I was not expecting any of the big names being bandied around (Gay, Iggy, Granger etc) but what I was expecting was for us to be smart about who we get and how much we spend.

We had $6 million under the cap which can get you a reasonably good player either via trade or via free agency. You also take into account Garcia's expiring and you have some currency to work with. Not great but it gives us some flexibility.

What we have done is halved that salary cap room and added yet another average player to an already average lot at SF. He does not make us better. In fact, I am not convinced he is ahead any of our sorry lot at SF. He struggles guarding a lot of SFs because of his lack of leg speed and footwork. He is a classic tweener.

I honestly would have rather seen up re-sign T-Will for that $2.8 million and call it a day and just see if anything else pops up where we can use that cap space and expiring deal to get solid player via trade down the track.

As it is now, we have limited ourselves for the season and most likely this move mean that we are not getting Williams back. When its all said and done, I don't think we got better at all. If anything, if Williams leaves, we are LESS talented (not counting T-Rob) because Williams is a more talented player than Johnson and I rather spend $3 million on an obvious talent, than on a classic tweener without real position in the NBA.

That is just me. Teams that are run well do not make these types of deals. Teams run by deluded, penny pinching owners precisely make these type of moves. I still go back to a clear fact, if James Johnson is as good as people here are making him out to be, he would not have been replaced by Ladry Fields and Toronto would not have been looking to trade him considering they are in just as desperate need for a SF as we are.

Further to that, we did not trade for Wright because apparently he was not enough of an upgrade for us but James Johnson is. While neither is ideal, Wright is a better player than Johnson.

All I want is for us to be smart about spending money and getting a clear upgrade at the position. This is yet another ill advised move where we spend the money and NOT get a clear upgrade at the position.

To season in a row we have blown away some $20 million of salary cap on Salmons, Hayes, Outlaw and Johnson and neither of them is a starter and most of them are not key role players on a good team. On lottery teams they might start but on good teams they are not rotation players.

I think a key difference is that Johnson is an expiring contract. We weren't going to get anyone really impactful for 6mil either, and we can still sign Twill for 3 mil if we want. If anything it simply limits our ability to accept salary back in trades by a rather small extent. The case is different from Outlaw/Salmons/Hayes in that it doesn't affect us beyond the year if he's of no use.

For a moment there I thought we got James Jones, who would be a pretty decent acquisition.
 
So now we have Salmons (just over $8 million), Garcia (just over $6.1 million), Outlaw ($3 million) and Johnson (just over $2.8 million) totalling $20 million invested in one position and not a legitimate starter between them.

Way to manage the finances and roster spots Kings. Awesome management and future planning. This is GM of the year type stuff! :rolleyes:

I really think you should look at this as a move on it's own and not lump it with Salmons and the rest. Sure it looks bad when you put it that way, but maybe we got a possible good role player, perhaps our backup SF, at 2.8mil for us to look at for 1 year. Doesn't seem that bad when you look at it from that angle.
 
I think a key difference is that Johnson is an expiring contract. We weren't going to get anyone really impactful for 6mil either, and we can still sign Twill for 3 mil if we want. If anything it simply limits our ability to accept salary back in trades by a rather small extent. The case is different from Outlaw/Salmons/Hayes in that it doesn't affect us beyond the year if he's of no use.

For a moment there I thought we got James Jones, who would be a pretty decent acquisition.

No well managed team will invest $20 million into one position and not not a legitimate starter amongst that sorry lot. $20 million!!! $6 million gets you a pretty good player in the NBA. We re-signed Thornton starting at $7 million. JT for just over $5 million.

And with this trade, unless there are any other trades on the horizon, you can forget about bringing T-Will back. Its just not going to happen.
 
I really think you should look at this as a move on it's own and not lump it with Salmons and the rest. Sure it looks bad when you put it that way, but maybe we got a possible good role player, perhaps our backup SF, at 2.8mil for us to look at for 1 year. Doesn't seem that bad when you look at it from that angle.

If this team did not have a long list of similar moves you might have a point but considering our history, this exactly should be looked as a whole package and not in individual move. All these SFs that we have on the roster are all individual moves made for the same reason as this latest one and each and every one of them has resulted to nothing but a headache for this team.

And I don't know about you but I would prefer to use my assets to get a starting SF and not worry about getting a back up SF. We already have more than enough back ups.
 
No well managed team will invest $20 million into one position and not not a legitimate starter amongst that sorry lot. $20 million!!! $6 million gets you a pretty good player in the NBA. We re-signed Thornton starting at $7 million. JT for just over $5 million.

And with this trade, unless there are any other trades on the horizon, you can forget about bringing T-Will back. Its just not going to happen.

Yes, but what starting SF was available that we were going to sign for 6mil?

I completely agree with you about our SF problems. That's why I was b*tching so much about not being able to get MKG. But that problem existed before we got Johnson, 2.8mil for 1 year is nothing compared to Salmons' contract. Don't take your anger out on the Johnson pickup - they are separate issues. Not getting Wright is an issue. Having Salmons is an issue. Getting Johnson for 2.8mil for 1 year? I don't think that's an issue. It really doesn't hurt our cap space very much, which leaves only 1 real issue which is that we probably won't bring Twill back. But then, I don't see how you can say that Twill is more talented when he couldn't make a roster until we picked him up. Why not hold your judgment till you see what Johnson brings?
 
Yes, but what starting SF was available that we were going to sign for 6mil?

I completely agree with you about our SF problems. That's why I was b*tching so much about not being able to get MKG. But that problem existed before we got Johnson, 2.8mil for 1 year is nothing compared to Salmons' contract. Don't take your anger out on the Johnson pickup - they are separate issues. Not getting Wright is an issue. Having Salmons is an issue. Getting Johnson for 2.8mil for 1 year? I don't think that's an issue. It really doesn't hurt our cap space very much, which leaves only 1 real issue which is that we probably won't bring Twill back. But then, I don't see how you can say that Twill is more talented when he couldn't make a roster until we picked him up. Why not hold your judgment till you see what Johnson brings?

T-Will not making roster has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with talent and everything to do with attitude at his previous stops and our new recruit has also had run ins with the coach and complained about his role on the offense! Not exactly the attitude of a role player.

I have seen enough of Johnson to say that he is not an upgrade on what we have. He is a classic tweener in every sense of the word. I am pretty sure that in 6 months time we will all be saying what a crap trade this was. At least Johnson is in the last year of his deal and we won't be stuck with him long term until of course we find another Johnson type deal in 12 months time.
 
T-Will not making roster has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with talent and everything to do with attitude at his previous stops and our new recruit has also had run ins with the coach and complained about his role on the offense! Not exactly the attitude of a role player.

I have seen enough of Johnson to say that he is not an upgrade on what we have. He is a classic tweener in every sense of the word. I am pretty sure that in 6 months time we will all be saying what a crap trade this was. At least Johnson is in the last year of his deal and we won't be stuck with him long term until of course we find another Johnson type deal in 12 months time.

I highly doubt I will be complaining about trading away a 2014 2nd round pick for someone who can't actually be detrimental to our team. Ah well whatever, I'm done trying to reason with you. Go wallow in your negativity.
 
I don't know if the videos accurately reflect what he does but he seems to attack the rim. Tyreke attacks the rim. I don't know what to expect from TRob but he isn't a back to the basket PF and may be a guy who can attack the rim. I don't know if this collection of players is good or bad. I certainly was hoping for a better player at SF and if he doesn't turn out to be a starter, I don't think anything has been improved. He's just a different kind of SF and I don't know who our starter is. At least he is better than Reke at SF. He fits what we might want at SF except for the skill level. It's a move in the right direction but not as big a possible not that I know what is possible.

I am not jumping up and down on Oprah's couch.
 
So now we have Salmons (just over $8 million), Garcia (just over $6.1 million), Outlaw ($3 million) and Johnson (just over $2.8 million) totalling $20 million invested in one position and not a legitimate starter between them.

Way to manage the finances and roster spots Kings. Awesome management and future planning. This is GM of the year type stuff! :rolleyes:
This is the biggest argument for this primarily being Goeff's mess. The Magoof screw up everything else, however.
 
James Johnson does have a bit of potential on D. He gets a lot of blocks and steals from the SF spot, and is a solid passer and rebounder too. There's the possiblity of keeping him in the paint to guard the basket if the team trusts T-rob to guard 3's. He's not a great shooter, but showed some 3 pt ability and can definitely attack the basket.

Johnson is a guy I've looked at when looking for wings who can block, certainly not the ideal move but I'm honestly not unhappy.
For all the noise about adding a good fit at SF, this is a poor man's AK47. I just would have preferred a bigger splash that would have shed a contract.
 
lll.emose saei pllw hcihw lab lamSyAP OT redRahMy take from here in poi,t Reyes station is great, let's play him.

With two 6-9 players, itllbe
 
lll.emose saei pllw hcihw lab lamSyAP OT redRahMy take from here in poi,t Reyes station is great, let's play him.

With two 6-9 players, itllbe

OK, so I think you meant to say

With two 6-9 players, it'll be harder to play small ball, which will please some. My take from here in Point Reyes Station is great, let's play him.

How did I do?
 
Back
Top